Thursday, February 18, 2010

Mangum Arrested (Updated)

The N&O, WRAL, and ABC-11 have reported that false accuser Crystal Mangum was arrested early this morning. She has been charged with a series of crimes, including attempted first-degree murder, five counts of arson, and three counts of child endangerment. (The Herald-Sun, on the other hand, suggests she was not charged with attempted murder.) In an interview with ABC News, Mike Nifong "initially said he doubted press reports about Mangum's arrest, saying he found news reports 'to be of questionable value.'"

This case will work its way through the system, and it is premature to suggest guilt or innocence at this stage. Perhaps Mangum’s new boyfriend (whom she allegedly assaulted and attempted to kill) and one of her children (who apparently called 911) were lying about what occurred; perhaps the police report was flawed. And as the police investigation is continuing, perhaps new information will come to light about the incident.

That said, a few items about the arrest that have some relevance to the lacrosse case:

1) At this point, only a handful of people—chiefly the cranks at the “justice4nifong” website and the hacks who take seriously the site’s rantings—cling to the fiction that Mike Nifong was basically an ethical guy, a prosecutor who pursued the lacrosse case in good faith and had probable cause to do so. For this handful of true-believers and their followers, whitewashing Mangum’s character is critical—the image of her is generally of an “honors student” and “working mom” who had no incentive to lie. Such an approach, of course, requires ignoring Mangum’s 2002 arrest, her habit of leveling major, unsubstantiated accusations against people even before the case, and the fact that she showed up to her meeting with the special prosecutors under the influence of various prescription drugs. Despite that background, it’s going to be hard for even the truest of true believers to continue to hail Mangum’s good character if anything like the incident as reported is true.

2) Given that Mangum was charged with three counts of child endangerment, this incident should prompt some questions for North Carolina’s Department of Child Protective Services. Before the lacrosse case broke, it’s easy to understand how someone like Mangum (who at that point had two children) could have slipped through the cracks. But the case brought to light some disturbing patterns of conduct—Mangum’s 2002 arrest; her seemingly very serious mental health problems; her showing up for her special prosecutor’s interview under the influence of various drugs; and perhaps most troublingly her spring 2006 behavior before the lacrosse party, as attested by her closest associates (Yolanda Haynes, Jarriel Johnson, “Fats” Thomas),which included her using her “drivers” to look after her children and her frequently being away from home for the entire evening servicing her clients.

Did CPS look into the condition of Mangum’s children before she was formally charged with child endangerment? If so, what was the result of their investigation?

3) As of this writing (12.24pm), the New York Times (which saw fit to run dozens of articles and columns on the lacrosse case) hasn’t mentioned the arrest. The arrest puts the Times in a bind: even after the Attorney General declared her a false accuser, the Times refused to identify Mangum, apparently on the grounds that publicly identifying someone who made a false accusation of rape would deter real victims from coming forward. No Times reporter has ever used Mangum’s name in the newspaper. (One subsequent article from the AP that appeared in a Times brief did do so.) So will the Times cover the arrest, or continue to shield Mangum’s identity from its readers?

[At 5.15pm, the Times provided its answer: it picked up the AP wire story [AP has used Mangum's name since the innocence declaration] rather than have one its own reporters cover the story.]

4) Wendy Murphy might finally get her wish. In a wild column, the extremist commentator suggested that the unreleased section of the discovery file might show how the “seasoned prosecutor” Nifong had a case all along. Of course, the only unreleased section of the file was the roughly 1000 pages of Mangum’s mental health records, which Nifong possessed throughout the case and which Judge Smith gave to the defense, under seal, late in the case. (Murphy’s suggestion that this material would show Nifong’s good faith or that perhaps he had a case is, of course, preposterous—this material almost certainly would show that Mangum was an even more unreliable accuser than the public came to realize.)

If Mangum’s current case manages to make it to trial, an obvious line of defense would be mental impairment—which means that Mangum’s mental health history could come into evidence.

Now, this will be interesting. Who in the Durham DA's Office can staff this case? Given the ever pending lawsuits, I presume conflicts abound. I further assume that Nifong will take up Mangum's defense pro bono--those two still deserve each other.

I'm only surprised that this next step in Mangum's complete self-destruction tour took so long.

Clearly, this incident is the result of the deep trauma Ms. Mangum suffered at the hands of the rich, privileged lacrosse players who assaulted her, and not a product of any long-staning mental health issues she might have.

The big question is this: will the same people who rushed to judgment and insisted that something "must" have happened at the lacrosse party use this incident as an occsasion to publicize the irrefutable fact that men, too, are victimized by domestic violence? My guess is they won't. I suspect that they will instead use this incident to publicize their preferred narrative: that domestic violence against men is too insignficant to discuss, and that this supposedly isolated case shouldn't distract us from the real issue, which is that men routinely assault women. They've had much practice using that same line of defense -- they said the same sorts of things when it turned out Ms. Mangum wasn't raped. That's when lots of people, thanks largely to this blog, learned the truth about how easy it is to destroy the life of an innocent man with a false rape claim.

I hope this highlights that those who choose not to prosecute CGM failed in their job to protect the public. The decision not to prosecute may have derived from chivalry, a liberal/feminist world view or perhaps genuine sympathy for a mentally disturbed individual but whatever the reason it was the wrong decision.

The public needs to be protected from criminals and CGM is a criminal.

Not surprised at all. Does anyone think a woman who had no qualms about trying to send six innocent men (she claimed she had been gang raped before) to prison was going to be a steller character? This case still disguists me on so many levels, the biggest one being that the people these "advocates" claimed to be helping (rape victims,racial prejudice) were the ones harmed most of all besides the team and their families. I wonder if they'll stand behind her now?

The first that comes to my mind is that Richard Brodhead, President of Duke University chose in 2006 to APOLOGIZE to Crystal. Something he nor the University has ever given to the members of the 2006 Lacrosse Team for wrongly firing Mike Pressler and a dozen other injustices.

This was inevitable. Crystal has never been held accountable at any point in her life for her outrageous antics, so there is no reason for her to change now. ALready, the seeds of her walking from this are there . . . attempted first degree murder at least appears to be stretch since it is based upon a comment she made and starting a fire in the bathtub. THe false identity charge is based upon her giving a false first name but a correct last name. Heck, she may not know her first name. By the arraignment, we will hear stories about how the boyfriend had it coming, was abusive, etc. and poor, poor Crystal was just defending the children. Charges will be reduced, the court will order her to get psychiatriac help, she'll be back on the street quickly. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I would pay good money to wath her testify at the civil trial when it gets to that point (and it will get to that point though it maytake years). Duke will not only look devious and sinister, but dumb as rocks.

Thank God there is now a reason to put her children in a safe environment--they are truly victims in all of this. Hopefully Crystal will get whatever she deserves...wish she and mikey could share a cell!!

A couple of friends forwarded the story about Ms. Mangum to me right away yesterday. One friend said, "I bet you're not surprised." And I had to reply, "Actually, I am stunned."

And I am.

In a rare departure from my fellow blog hooligans (there's practically a party at Liestoppers), I am sad about this.

As I recall, it was the hope of some (and maybe all) the defendants, their families and their lawyers that not pursuing charges against Ms. Mangum would allow her to regroup and change her life for the better.

Although Ms. Mangum possibly has been overcharged in this case, any hope (legitimately based on the successful completion of her degree and the possiblity of better adherence to her treatment) she might be able to achieve and maintain some stability for herself and her children seems completely obliterated with this latest crack up.

Crystal Gail "Precious" Mangum remains a low-life, conniving street hoodlum. Someone who sees the world around her as an opportunity to reach out and grab something. No personal responsibility, no compassion, no regard for others. Just what is in it for her.

The Durham authorities dealt properly with Ms. Mangum, initially. The cop who got her out of Kim's car at the convenience store (after their LAX performance) radioed in that Precious was drunk.

Everything up to that point was done well. But, instead of hauling Mangum's anatomy down to the drunk tank.....

Precious began to manipulate the system ... so she could get a comfortable hospital bed, instead of a fleabag cell.

At the hospital, SANE trainee Tara Levicy "believed the Viktum", and wrote up an imaginary rape. Nurse Levicy later embellished the initial report with more imagination.

Michael Nifong, former attorney and Durham DA, made the innocent assumption that another $15K in his pension was clearly worth the freedom of three innocent college students.

An incredible array of sycophants, advocates, agitators, crazies, left-wingers, out-of-control newscasters, agenda-driven academics, and radicals used the situation to gain influence and power.

The current incident is merely another in Mangum's history as low-life street trash. She'll probably be convicted, and either get a suspended or serve some short time. It was a domestic dispute; the small fire was in a bathtub.

Lastly, schadenfreude (malicious joy in the misfortune of others) is not an admirable viewpoint.

wicked wendy would probably defend cgm by claiming post traumatic stress from the "rape" caused her actions. If she does that, she opens the door to the prosecution to impeach the claim. What better way to impeach by introducing the evidence from the "rape" case to show cgm was not raped.

Any defense attorney who tried that defense would risk putting all of cgm's falseness into the present case.

What has Nancy Grace had to say about this? What about Jane Velez Mitchell? Waht has Joy Behar and the clique of the view had to say about this? What has NOW, feministing, feministe or ,any other man hating site had to say about it?

"Lastly, schadenfreude (malicious joy in the misfortune of others) is not an admirable viewpoint."

Perhaps not, but there is a point where someone's misdeeds reduce your concern with whether or not they are experiencing misfortune. Is this a awful misfortune for CGM? Yes it is, but the time when I could have greatly cared is long past.

I am more heartily cheered by the fact that "Duke lacrosse accuser charged with attempted murder" stories have finally driven off the front page of Google results for "Duke lacrosse" those websites which were still publishing "breaking news" about 'three rotten racist lacrosse players raped and beat a poor unfortunate single mom working as a stripper to put herself through college and yeah technically we should have said 'alleged to have' but let's face it, those rapist assholes don't deserve that consideration.' It's been a while since I checked but I know that even a year after the declaration of innocence, you could find such pages within the first ten returned results.

Wendy is an ex-prosecutor who specialized in child abuse and sex crimes cases. The first lawyer in the country to run a program to provide free legal services to crime victims, Wendy has been fighting for victims' rights for twenty years.

Having served as a Visiting Scholar at Harvard Law School, Wendy now represents crime victims in civil and criminal cases and teaches an advanced seminar on sexual violence at the New England School of Law in Boston. As an adjunct professor, she also manages the Sexual Violence Legal News and Judicial Language projects at her law school and consults with crime victims across the country to help them achieve justice.

Wendy writes scholarly and pop culture articles, and lectures widely on victims' rights, sex crimes, violence against women and children, media coverage of crime and the criminal justice system. Wendy has worked as a legal analyst for CBS News, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC. She appears regularly on cable and network news programs to provide commentary on legal news stories. And Justice For Some is her first book.

A former NFL cheerleader, Wendy has also written three childrens' books. She lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.

In many ways if not most, this is not a story about Mangum, but rather, it is a story about an immature and undisciplined and selfish faculty at Duke. These people are really a prisoner of their own dogma . . . much like the Islamic factions which attempted to takeover Iraq terrorizing with threats of punishment and worse even as they cut off fingers and such. There is just a fear that runs through any college or university in the face of an academy in full heat of conspired indignity. Everone else is prejudiced or wrong. What a fraud these people were and are.

There is another vital issue that you didn't mention: since Mangum has now been charged with an entire rainbow of crimes, why shouldn't she now be charged for her false accusations as well?

And I have no problem "assuming" that she's guilty of the lion's share of these charges; the evidence is overwhelming. This is in no way similar to taking one proven liar's word against that of numerous Lacrosse players.

Meanwhile, the civil lawsuits are finally starting to move. Judge Beaty issued an order the end of last week allowing the plaintiffs (lacrosse players and families) to file amended complaints including state law claims against the defendants. The judge also set a briefing schedule which should bring his key rulings on the motions to dismiss in about 2 months. Glacially slow, but moving.

Newsweek on-line has just come out with a new narrative by Susannah Meadows about Crystal's predicament. Meadows' prejudices show,however, by her odd use of the "cotton shirt" remark in the final paragraph of the story-- taken totally out of context and without explanation to try again to paint the lacrosse players as racists.

Mangum graduated with honors? Wants to get a doctorate? Open a home for women? Yep, Ph.D. in substance abuse, prostitution and fabrications...... while she continues toward self destruction as well as exposure of three children to drugs, violence, sexual chaos, and emotional trauma. Great. I don't give a damn about Mangum, but I am heartsick to hear the voice of a nine year old child saying, "please hurry, they are fighting"...on a 911 call. Why aren't the 88s and the pot-bangers all lathered up over the plight of these children?? Where's Big Al and the Rev Jesse, to step in advocate for these kiddos?

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review